Category Archives: right-to-buy

Lets All Move to….Wales*

Posted on by
Reply

A small victory for the Welsh Assembly this week. They had been trying to get a Legislative Competence Order past Westminster to transfer a series of powers relating to social housing. This was lost in the sweeping up week prior to the dissolution of Parliament as the Conservative party was most unhappy with the transfer of control of Right to Buy provisions to the Assembly, apparently on the belief that there would be a suspension of Right to Buy in Wales.

The situation had not improved once the new Coalition government was installed and the Assembly was considering a referendum next year to force the transfer. Fortunately, sanity has … Read the full post

How binding is a s.125 notice?

Posted on by
2

Nessa v London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2010] EWCA Civ 559

This is an interesting appeal on the issue of the amendment or replacement of a S.125 Housing Act 1985 notice offering the right to buy at a specified price. The actual case itself is not particularly interesting as it turns out, but there are some comments by the Court of Appeal that open up a whole other can of worms.

Ms Nessa was the secure tenant of Tower Hamlets, jointly with Mr Uddin, since 1996. On 4 April 2006 they claimed the right to buy. The price was to be based on the open market value of the flat … Read the full post

Shake your windows

Posted on by
4

Craighead v Homes for Islington & LB Islington [2010] UKUT 47 (LC) is a decision of Andrew Trott in the Upper Tribunal on an appeal from the LVT. 21 leaseholders faced bills of £30-40,000 for service charges between 2006 and 2008 relating to “external repairs & decoration, window/roof renewal”. Given the size of the bills it is not surprising that they went to the LVT. The respondents, Islington (the freeholder) and Homes for Islington (HFI – their ALMO), succeeded in the LVT. There were three issues on appeal before Mr Trott, which he identified at [8] as:

  1. Whether the LVT erred in its conclusion that the sources from which the respondents

    2. … Read the full post

Self Insurance and Right to Buy leases

Posted on by
Reply

Mihovilovic v Leicester CC [2010] UKUT 22 (LC)

Another Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) case. This was an appeal by the leaseholders of an LVT decision in respect of service and major works charges levied by Leicester City Council, the freeholder. There were three main issues in the appeal:

i) A charge for insurance of the building had been levied, but Leicester had not in fact obtained insurance, choosing to ‘self insure’. The LVT had found that Leicester could include a charge in respect of this self-insurance.

ii) The LVT had found that works to communal windows and to communal doors fell outside the s. 20(1) Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 … Read the full post

Limiting the right to buy (in Scotland)?

Posted on by
Reply

The SNP have announced that they intend to abolish the right to buy for all new build council and social housing in Scotland. The policy is intended to safeguard up to 18,000 social homes.

Figures in England show a steep decline in interest in the right to buy and it is hard to see that the last year will have altered that situation. I wonder if something similar may now happen in England and Wales, given that some Councils are building again?… Read the full post

HLPA Conference

Posted on by
1

The Housing Law Practitioners Association (“HLPA”) host their annual conference on December 15, 2009 at the Royal College of Surgeons, London. Details have just been released (with more to follow later in September) and can be found at www.profbriefings.co.uk/hlc2009.

Highlights include:

(a) Richard Drabble QC giving the key note speech. Richard has had a very active year in the housing field having appeared in Manchester CC v Pinnock, R (Weaver) v L&Q, Hanoman v LB Southwark and Austin v LB Southwark;

(b) Jan Luba QC outlining the expected developments in housing law in 2010. Given that Jan’s work in Holmes-Moorhouse v LB Richmond, Austin v LB Southwark… Read the full post

Outstanding and Relevant

Posted on by
1

Scinto v London Borough of Newham [2009] EWCA Civ 837 is an appeal from Bow County Court on whether the tenant was still entitled to exercise her right to buy on terms first set out in December 1999.

Miss Scinto initiated the right to buy process in September 1999.  In December 1999 Newham sent an offer notice addressed to both Miss Scinto and her son detailing the offer price and the statutory discount that had been applied.  The offer notice also identified some structural defects.

In September 2000 Miss Scinto’s solicitors sent a surveyor’s report, identifying some serious structural problems, to Newham.  They told Newham that without extensive repair works … Read the full post